Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Recommended Posts

It's a sign that GW are beginning to think more 'professionally' when looking at how the game is managed and presented. She's a seasoned professional presenter, and that shows immediately. Would be cool to see this attitude in other areas of the company, like play-testing, but it's a really good step in the right direction. 

 

I wonder if the board are looking at the incredibly high profits and realising they can afford to do more like this? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Dragobeth said:

TL;DR: I'm pretty sure that if Becca was a guy we couldn't be having this topic and no one could have put in doubt what is her experience with wargaming, so I think we might have a problem in how we see the world. More people in the hobby whatever their sex/gender is will always be a good thing and usually the prejuices over a gender within a community is a part of why no new people joined the community.

This is what I also thought. We wouldn't talk about these things if the presenter wasn't a girl. But I am also not sure if this also is relevant, because she is a "good-looking" girl. Maybe we would also have the same discussion if the presenter would be an overly good-looking male.

So in the end I don't really know if this is more of a gender-issue or a "beauty-issue". So I am not sure of that. But I really like the steps GW is taking in including female characters. Most of them don't feel forced in my opinion (for example, Naeve). Also the newest Nighthaunt faction leader is also a female (a dead female). I can understand that for some things might get too political. But I think if you include female characters with interesting backstories and a good diversity of personality types, there is a good chance of this not becoming too forced. So at the moment I would say that GW is moving in the right direction. 

Edited by Infeston
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Enoby said:

(Sorry, I don't think I saw your post after the edit, so I'll try reply properly)

Could you provide the Scandinavian study, please. I've been unable to find it. 

You mention that men and women can't compete in the same group hierarchy. What exactly do you mean by this? I can definitely see the argument for physical activities, but in Warhammer there's nothing to suggest that men and women will perform inherently differently. 

I don't think making a hobby more gender neutral would harm males either, though. I'm not suggesting making the hobby feminine, but rather less masculine (so more towards neutral - so both genders can enjoy it without stigmatization). The hobby wouldn't need to become dominated by women, just more welcoming towards them. Assuming GW isn't going to pull anything like "The Emperor is really a women" and instead would just add more female representation where it would make sense,

. From the newer ones that I can remember right now was the one done by Una Tellhed and Anna Jansson from the

Lund universities psychology institute, and no they are not social psycholgist, so you don't have to worry. There really should be a lot of the stuff, I mean there were of articles about it, really big thing in the late 90s, early 2000s. Started with the problems they had with equality in the number of new students, which was thought to be a good idea in the begining. But backfired when suddenly institutes with a female population bigger then the male one started having problems with getting the proper number of applicants.
 
As the can't compete thing goes. Well first of all man and women work in a different way. They have different goal, and I don't mean personal goals, those are always different, I mean goals as a group within a certain job. They have different expectations, and follow different norms of interaction.
 
As the dominated by women goes, well if you fit any group with a rule set to fit a sub group. Lets say you change the teachers job from the way it worked pre war to what western sociaties have today. Then it is normal that group is going to be naturally filled with more members of the sub, and fewer of other sub scrub, Specially if the sub group can't fit in to the new group policy.  You more or less get this in the teaching system western countries have right now. It went from the  rat race type, competition style, strickt rules of the pre war era to what there is today. And we see that while the system before it suited males more, in the new one females execl. And the results of it is more females then males at universities, more males droping out of school[comparing to the old times, males always droped out more often from school then females]etc. So in the end it is a natural thing. There are no 50/50 split enviroments, not even death and taxs are equal as far as gender goes :D
 
Quote

I can't see the average man being upset by that - but if so, why? Regardless, I feel we may have strayed onto gender representation in the workplace, which is a different kettle of fish to gender representation in hobbies. 

I think someone else mentioned it. The problem some man may have is not that there are or maybe more women in the w40k world, from little we known we are getting SoB, because everyone wanted them, but they rather fear something they have seen in video games or comics. When suddenly iron man is female, thor is female and there are british line troopers that female in WWII. I think they have problem with that. Or to be even more precise, the problem is that that someone is made a female or male, but that setting/story suffers from someone forcing females or males, for the sake of forcing them in and not making a good story or better setting. To use another GW example. A female rendeemer would be just as cool as a male one. The story build around neferata is great and tragic. a Chamber of stormcasts that is all female, and better at everything other chambers do, and even chaos gods are secretly in awe/love of them, is not. People just afraid, because stuff like that was done in the past in other mediums, and it did not end well.

Quote

I don't think Becca is "eye's candy", just becouse she is a woman she is not in that possition to give dudebros "eye's candy

Well considering the male psychology, 8 out of 10 females are eye candy for most of the male population, and if you subtract the number of ****** man from that group, you almost end up at 100% of women being eye candy to some part of the male population. It sadly does not work like that the other way :D

 

:edit: I did not write anything offensive in the stared out part. Somehow g a y is considered an offensive word by the filter.

 

Quote

This is what I also thought. We wouldn't talk about these things if the presenter wasn't a girl. But I am also not sure if this also is relevant, because she is a "good-looking" girl. Maybe we would also have the same discussion if the presenter would be an overly good-looking male.

Well maybe other arguments would have had been used, but males are confrontational by nature, It would have had mattered it would contested no matter what. It would have be done by a "hero" class individual and probablly from within the community too. And as much there are buckets of great in hobby, I don't think there are many who could have pulled it off. Maybe if Chambers did people would be ok. On the flip side of course, why would he want to do it, besides being paid for it of course.

 

 

 

Edited by blueshirtman
  • Like 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm a little soft sponge but I saw Becca and literally just thought "Oh they got a person whose known in the community, nice". Didn't think any more of it. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, blueshirtman said:

Well that has more to do with the company side of hobby. If you take a group of males, and lets assume those are western males, as problly it is the case with GW games fans. Anything that can find interest among a large part of that population is good. You of course want some varity, that is why you get the mongol or viking space marines. But an army directed at a group, and it doesn't really matter how the group is formed, that is not a large part of the buyers group, is just going to be a waste of money. This of course doesn't mean there are 0 dudes who want to play a destruction orc that is hindukush/afganistan inspired, or that such an army couldn't be cool. It just wouldn't be very profitable.

You mention profitability, but who is to say what won't be profitable? Marvel likely didn't foresee the insane profits of Black Panther relative to their other films, and I'd be hard-pressed to find someone who would have foreseen a bleak, violent adult fantasy series turning into HBO'S money printer. I'd argue that the more standard and "marketable" a product, the less likely it'll grab people. 

If you say, "Dark Elves", I think, "okay." If you tell me, "oh and they're an all-female cult who worship the God of Murder and have Greek Mythology inspired models", you've got my attention. Similarly, if someone says, Goblins, I won't care too much. But if you describe them as Afghan-themed guerrilla fighters with crazy weapons or Forest-dwellers who worship and control spiders? That is interesting. 

Diversity is, contrary to the opinion of some, not unprofitable. I'd argue that the wilder and the less homogeneous the product, the more fans it will earn.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sleboda said:

That's very true, but I think what makes the choice somewhat suspect is that her delivery makes her feel disconnected from the material. In other words, it feels lke she's not actually into the game.

It's not just her, though. There are other reviewers who have a similar style, male and female alike. It harms the presentation by making the viewer focus overly on the presenter since the actual content is seemingly not something they are genuinely into.

For a male example, see  Rodney Smith of Watch It Played. Polished, clean, good looking person ... but comes across feeling overly produced and not actually someone who has played, or even likes the games he is reviewing.

He and Becca may very well be bonkers for their games, but the content of their videos are pretty much just 'person reading you the rules well' as opposed to 'person with a passion for the game who wants to share that passion with you.'

I mean no disrespect to either. As someone with lots of experience directing on-screen talent, I can definitely say it's not easy to be on camera and be smooth. I'm just saying that maybe some folks are questioning the selection of Becca because of her apparent lack of genuine interest in, and passion for, the things she is saying. That leaves viewers perhaps overly focused on appearance.

 

Thank you! 

I've watched a few videos from both of those channels and didn't particularly like them, but couldn't  figure out why. Videos were well-polished, professional and the content was clear.  But I think you've nailed it, there - something's lost in the delivery/production. I'll admit I probably judged G&S more harshly (and unfairly), than Watch It Played though. 

That said, I doubt they could've gotten anyone better to do the job. Tutorial videos for games in general are pretty difficult to create in a way that's engaging and effective. Shut Up and Sit Down to great reviews, and their tutorials are great fun to watch, but you'll still need to read the rules afterwards. On the other hand, Watch it Played do a great job of teaching you the rules, but the videos are far less fun to watch. Tricky to balance the two.

 

And just to throw completely worthless anecdote into the boys like y/girls like x debate. There's quite a few of male gamers in my local community - myself included - that completely avoid the competitive scene in favour of narrative gaming.  I'd say we focus on the building/painting side of things too, but I wouldn't be kidding anyone. Bunch of hobby butterflies through-and-through...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, this topic really evolved and took an interesting turn from yesterday evening to this morning. It's interesting to see the different reactions to Becca Scott as well as to the inclusion of female gamers, their reception as well as studies on their possible motivations* .  

Some things stand out especially:

1 hour ago, blueshirtman said:

Well about male/female stuff. Males are competition focused a lot more, at least in the common understanding of word competition. So lets say in sports, you have both male and female version of probablly every sport imaginable, not sure if there is a male version of synchronised swimming or female version of water ball.

But if you check the fans, you will notice that the number and intensity of fandom among males and females is different. And not just because males are more mono focused then females . IMO it is an extension of the old tribal ways humans. And while there are things like female hooligans, the number of them is drasticly lower then that of males. And I don't think any take part in the official fights hooligans have.

This "divide" in Sports isn't necessarily one created by basic psychological traits and the different  emphasis in males and females, but one of cultural upbringing and history, the later having heavy influences on the former. Many sports were historically speaking dominated by male competitors and male spectators. The opening for versions for both genders is a relativly new one, so naturally it takes some time to build up competitions and fanbases for the new female and male versions. In both fanbases, you will find moderate fans as well as hardend fanatics of both gender. To be honest, some of the most aggressive and unpleasant encounters in Football were with female fans - boy, can they be aggressiv even to a physical level. The lack of women in hooligans is less of a lack of aggression but more one of compartmentalisation by the existing firms, preserving a predominate male group, with women only serving as prestigious objects - a archaic world view and form of society, based on a long standing cultural development. 

 

15 minutes ago, blueshirtman said:

And the results of it is more females then males at universities, more males droping out of school[comparing to the old times, males always droped out more often from school then females]etc.

This lacks a through look at history. Higher Dropout rates in higher education are not, at least not solely as put by you, due to a change in system to favour women. Rather it is based on a higher number of students at universities. You get a higher number of attendees, you have higher numbers of dropouts, especially in a system were it is thought off, that everyone needs a degree to be successful and apprenticeships are view as lower forms of education and less worthy jobs. Putting more pressure on students that would have chosen otherwise not to go to university.

 

@blueshirtman there could be much more said about your statements, both the quoted as well and especially the unquoted ones, but it would take to much time and some of your statements I don't want to touch or feel others here are more qualified to disprove you on them. Just let me say, your arguments and view points are somewhat two-dimensional and simplified. 

 

 

*=I especially enjoy the academic contributions. @Enoby is it possible for you to link to the articles if they are on academia or Researchgate? I Really like to have a look at them, but right now have only access to anthropological libraries, with a hard focus on prehistory.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Bloodmaster said:

*=I especially enjoy the academic contributions. @Enoby is it possible for you to link to the articles if they are on academia or Researchgate? I Really like to have a look at them, but right now have only access to anthropological libraries, with a hard focus on prehistory.

I can say something about Daniel N. Stern, which was cited by @Enoby. I have never read Stern directly, but only citations of him in the following book:

https://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+I+in+We%3A+Studies+in+the+Theory+of+Recognition-p-9780745652320

But I can really recommend this book if you want to get into Recognition Theory, for example. There are many examples and reasonable argumentations why many aspects of human "nature" are based on recognition and acceptance of others. Even what we would call basic instincts and behavioural structures.

Edited by Infeston
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll put in my two cents. I thought Becca Scott did a great job of the videos, very well presented and just the right amount of detail. Also, I love the female Stormcasts, it's great to see these heroic women on the tabletop, just like all the exceptional women I have been fortunate to know in the real world. I am actively working on a Stormcast warband at the moment and can't wait to do Angharad Brightshield - she's probably my favourite Stormcast. My niece has been joining us for some games this year and I really wish I had more female models to make her feel more included. (Don't worry though - I am working on it!)

Edited by Greyshadow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion, I think it's a good thing to have more women in our hobby. At playstores but also at GW.

I don't know if it will change positively something for the hobby or for us but I also don't see why it will have a negative effect.

Just more players to have fun with ! :) 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think having Becca Scott doing these videos is kinda hitting many flies with one stone:
- professional
- experience
- recognition
- presentable
- diversity

It's sad, and speaks a lot about the current state of geekdom, that our prejudices tell us that a woman is there because for the "eye candy".

Much as I love the new GW community staff, these categories were never their strong suit. While this will not make AoS (or WH40K) mainstream, but it will have a broader reach this way. Which is good for the game and good for GW.

On topic of "How do we make the game more attractive to female players?":
- more and diverse female characters be they lead characters, or not. I hear and read the same thing that Enoby described. In geek culture there is not enough badass female role models for girls. Most cartoons only had token females, She-Ra was the only, somewhat, action oriented show back in the day. Stuff like Kim Possible is still a minority nowadays.
- more representation and a welcoming community. These videos are the step in the right direction. People need to be accustomed to the idea that girls/women also play the game. The hobby (well, geekdom in general) needs to lose the "boys club" aspect.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does she have to be one or the other? She is both an attempt to get more girls into the hobby and eye candy at the same time. 

Having a beautiful young woman present a new product is pretty much standard practice in many industries and the fact that Becca Scott is already an established personality within the tabletop gaming sphere makes her a perfect fit. 

When it comes to women and their interest in wargaming, their barrier of entry can be many things, first and foremost the tendency for these games to focus on inherently masculine qualities. This is to be expected - we can't change the fact that war has been predominately waged by men for all of our history, nor can we change the fact that men and women tend to have different fields of interest.

Now, in a fictional setting where eternal war is the entire premise, masculine features will be in the foreground and thus most little girls are probably not interested in pursuing that kind of hobby. Femcasts and things like hiring Becca will do some legwork in mitigating these problems, giving girls characters to identfy better with and making it "ok" for girls to like what has been considered a hobby for boys.

I don't expect a huge female influx into the hobby because of its aforementioned strictly masculine qualities, but I can totally see those girls/mothers who were on the fence about the hobby being swayed by the new approach, which is a good thing in my book.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the male v female competitiveness front, I'd urge anyone to have a game of Magic against my wife. I thought I was competitive, and then I introduced her to the game as something for us to do, and so began an arms race that would rival the Cold War. Exactly the same happened when we played X-Wing. She fit the mental profile of a veteran TIE Intercepter ace perfectly with her inability to finish a game until all my fighters had been shot down. It's almost scary. I'd suggest that in an equal playing field, women are just as likely to be competitive as men, especially in board/card/tabletop games.

I'm all for getting people involved. Runebrush is right in that the stigma towards people who like fantasy type stuff has significantly decreased. Lord of the Rings was definitely the start, but it's been increased tenfold by things like Big Bang Theory (like it or loathe it) and Game of Thrones. The way Games Workshop are introducing more females hasn't felt forced, and I for one am a massive fan of having more people in the hobby. 

Becca Scott did a decent job, though they need to get rid of the camera angle where she's looking at the front camera whilst being filmed from the side. As for her attractiveness, lets not be naive about it - she's not there as eye candy, but as with anything in advertising, it certainly helps. If you are aesthetically pleasing, you stand a better chance at holding people's attention! I'd say in this instance it's a nice bonus for GW as opposed to being the reason they chose her. She is a presenter after all.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I will also throw in.  It's amazing that GW are creating realistic female characters (finally a warrior wearing full armour rather than a thong), but also don't forget the number of beasts and creatures that GW are knocking out of the park.  Out of the various ladies I know and speak to, the vast majority have picked up one or more beasties because they went "wow, that looks fun to paint/play".  This weekend I spoke to one lady who was on maw crusha number three, and one close friend is currently working on a rogue idol - to go with her stardrake, maw crusha and leviadon (just the creature - the riders have gone in the bits box).  As a bloke it's really easy to go "I think women want X" when in reality a nurgling doing something amusing will be just as appealing.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

One thing I will also throw in.  It's amazing that GW are creating realistic female characters (finally a warrior wearing full armour rather than a thong), but also don't forget the number of beasts and creatures that GW are knocking out of the park.  Out of the various ladies I know and speak to, the vast majority have picked up one or more beasties because they went "wow, that looks fun to paint/play".  This weekend I spoke to one lady who was on maw crusha number three, and one close friend is currently working on a rogue idol - to go with her stardrake, maw crusha and leviadon (just the creature - the riders have gone in the bits box).  As a bloke it's really easy to go "I think women want X" when in reality a nurgling doing something amusing will be just as appealing.

Jeah. The cool thing about beasts is that they can be considered neutral. They can be either male or female. 

But I also heard the Lord-Incantor has a female and a male model (I think the male one will be released later)? Is this correct? In my opinion this also seems to be a cool move from GW to make female and male versions of the same model, so we can create what we like.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, CaptainNippon said:

Why does she have to be one or the other? She is both an attempt to get more girls into the hobby and eye candy at the same time. 

Having a beautiful young woman present a new product is pretty much standard practice in many industries and the fact that Becca Scott is already an established personality within the tabletop gaming sphere makes her a perfect fit. 

Of cause she can be both, in fact men and women could be both hypothetically. The Problem arises form the notion that eye candy often results in an objectification of the person in question. Something that is a problem that women throughout history had to endure far too often and to extensive degrees. A result was, and sadly still is, that the qualifications and qualities are pushed back behind superficial elements.  Depending on the situation, this hasn't necessarily to be a bad thing, but more often results in strange forms of discrimination, often in unintended  ways. As you said, it's a usual practice in industries, not only tabletop, but all across branches.  It is fueled by and a result of a form of hypersexualisation in advertising and society in generell. And it is a self-fueling circle, that exploieds both men and women, but the later more often and extensively. 

It is quite an interesting topic, but also a double-edged sword, where a neural exchange and a fruitful discussion is far too often impossible. The case at hand can be seen as such an example, while relatively harmless and civilised discussed here. Becca Scott can be either seen as eye candy or a qualified presenter/promoter, that is there to include and invite women into the hobby, depending on your views and goals. She might even be seen as a danger to manhood as a femal entering and thus softening a masculine domain - which is a weird way of seeing things and especially telling about the introspection and the insecurities of people with such a point of view, tbh. 

In general, the topic is far to often one, where non can win and everyone loses at the end of the day, because an unhealthy climate of exchange. Even in academics the topic is often overburdened with ideologies and stuck in very bad places. And the different reactions are very revealing on the views and the self-awareness of the participants as well as their social upbringing.  Social inequality based on races and sex/gender, not the difference, is a necessary topic, on which society can and should grow, but one with many shoals.

 

5 minutes ago, Infeston said:

Jeah. The cool thing about beasts is that they can be considered neutral. They can be either male or female. 

But I also heard the Lord-Incantor has a female and a male model (I think the male one will be released later)? Is this correct? In my opinion this also seems to be a cool move from GW to make female and male versions of the same model, so we can create what we like.

yes, there will be both versions, the male one coming alongside the Batteltome

 

Edited by Bloodmaster
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Greyshadow said:

Also, I love the female Stormcasts, it's great to see these heroic women on the tabletop, just like all the exceptional women I have been fortunate to know in the real world. I am actively working on a Stormcast warband at the moment and can't wait to do Angharad Brightshield - she's probably my favourite Stormcast. My niece has been joining us for some games this year and I really wish I had more female models to make her feel more included. (Don't worry though - I am working on it!)

Yeah, I wish GW would make more female Stormcast (I mean from older kits). My Yelena sadly looks a little transgender, with the male body I converted ?

Actually I'm having fun by making my "Maiden Guard" and it's a really nice thing making a female army that isn't oversexualized:

 

Edited by EMMachine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bloodmaster said:

Of cause she can be both, in fact men and women could be both hypothetically. The Problem arises form the notion that eye candy often results in an objectification of the person in question. Something that is a problem that women throughout history had to endure far too often and to extensive degrees. A result was, and sadly still is, that the qualifications and qualities are pushed back behind superficial elements.  Depending on the situation, this hasn't necessarily to be a bad thing, but more often results in strange forms of discrimination, often in unintended  ways. As you said, it's a usual practice in industries, not only tabletop, but all across branches.  It is fueled by and a result of a form of hypersexualisation in advertising and society in generell. And it is a self-fueling circle, that exploieds both men and women, but the later more often and extensively. 

It is quite an interesting topic, but also a double-edged sword, where a neural exchange and a fruitful discussion is far too often impossible. The case at hand can be seen as such an example, while relatively harmless and civilised discussed here. Becca Scott can be either seen as eye candy or a qualified presenter/promoter, that is there to include and invite women into the hobby, depending on your views and goals. She might even be seen as a danger to manhood as a femal entering and thus softening a masculine domain - which is a weird way of seeing things and especially telling about the introspection and the insecurities of people with such a point of view, tbh. 

In general, the topic is far to often one, where non can win and everyone loses at the end of the day, because an unhealthy climate of exchange. Even in academics the topic is often overburdened with ideologies and stuck in very bad places. And the different reactions are very revealing on the views and the self-awareness of the participants as well as their social upbringing.  Social inequality based on races and sex/gender, not the difference, is a necessary topic, on which society can and should grow, but one with many shoals.

I agree with most of what you said. Objectification is a thing, but there is also genuine attraction and making use of that. Good looking people will be chosen as presenters because they garner more attention, which I think is a primal instinct and not a fault of society.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EMMachine said:

Yeah, I wish GW would make more female Stormcast (I mean from older kits)

One thing that was said at the new products seminar at Warhammer Fest is that the new Stormcast releases are going to have a higher proportion of female models in to more accurately reflect the background of the Stormcast.  I would imagine that there will be plenty of conversion opportunities for these into older units.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

One thing that was said at the new products seminar at Warhammer Fest is that the new Stormcast releases are going to have a higher proportion of female models in to more accurately reflect the background of the Stormcast.  I would imagine that there will be plenty of conversion opportunities for these into older units.

A little off topic but would also love to see some Fyreslayer Runedaughters (I assume they must exist) / Female Berserkers (if nothing else to break up the monotony of the sculpts). I know the joke about female Dwarfs/Dwarves/Duardin is an old one but still would be cool to see. Plus it'd be one of the few scenarios where the female models would probably have more clothes on than the male ones :D

  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, VoodooChileIRL said:

A little off topic but would also love to see some Fyreslayer Runedaughters (I assume they must exist) / Female Berserkers (if nothing else to break up the monotony of the sculpts). I know the joke about female Dwarfs/Dwarves/Duardin is an old one but still would be cool to see. Plus it'd be one of the few scenarios where the female models would probably have more clothes on than the male ones :D

What are you talking about? The range already has plenty of women. It's your untrained manling eyes who can't tell Dwarf women apart with your beard bias. Shameful. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of "nerd" areas of interest are diversifying in ways that don't ostracise their core audience and as such can be considered win wins.

For example adding ****** characters seems to be fairly popular in comics, video games and TV recently. I can think of a few examples for instance the ****** romance they had on the TV show Arrow a few years ago. The core male audience are fine with this because they find it erotic to see two attractive women in a sexual relationship as part of the media they enjoy. Likewise the show benefits by being able to say "we love diversity look at our ******". In this sense they get diversity without the same level of risk as if they added characters that make the core audience uncomfortable. 

GW get the win win here in that they can state they are being more diverse and show they care about female inclusion, while also appealing to their core audience. Because let's be honest, a lot of female figures related to "nerdy" persuits can use the fact they are fairly attractive as a big boon to their career. I might get called out as a sexist but I doubt a woman less attractive would have the same level of success and popularity.

Edit: apparently using lgbt terms is censored. 

Edited by HollowHills

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, CaptainNippon said:

I agree with most of what you said. Objectification is a thing, but there is also genuine attraction and making use of that. Good looking people will be chosen as presenters because they garner more attention, which I think is a primal instinct and not a fault of society.

Yes of cause. But there is "using attractive people to sell stuff" and "using attractive people to sell stuf, in a sexualized way". Don't get me wrong, GW did nothing of the later, but non the less it could be viewed as such, if one wants to - thats what makes the topic a mine field.
Another thing I was refering to, is the notion that even viewing her as eyecandy can be and sometimes is used as a way to  objectify, especially women. And Far to often that's the case with women in "nerdhood", where they are at the same time aliens, objects of lust and enemies trying to degrade the masculinity of "True" Nerds - which luckily is not the case for the majority of nerds and geeks.

Nevertheless it is a topic and a problem we as a community have to talk about and deal with. Especially after the reactions to Comics and Magic, both of which opening up to a broader more diverse communityand enforcing against discrimination, resulting in utter, disgusting  Sh*tsorms from a vocal minority, that tried to keept the community "clean" in their twisted mindes. And Warhammer - both 40k and AoS -  is sadly no stranger to this. Youtubers like Arch Warhammer is a brillant example of this bigotry. I would suggest to watch his videos for examples of what I mean, but that only would give him views and fuel is hatred, so simply don't do it. His dispute with Spikeybits, at least the spikeybits side of it, makes for an interesting read (never thought I would recommend a SB article...).

 

an intersting read might be the Facebook Page "Feminist 40k", where you can get all kinds of insight  on both sides of that coin

Edited by Bloodmaster
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I really like the discussions and love how sensible and open-minded everyone in this topic is. Even the people disagreeing with some of the statements. I don't want to interrupt the topic. But I felt the need to point this out, because more than often threads about gender or diversity on the internet tend to end in badly. 

But I feel people are respecting each others opinions in this thread. I just wanted to point that out. I am more interested in reading this discussion at the moment, than participating in it. ? 

Edited by Gaz Taylor
swearing
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Infeston said:

I have to say that I really like the discussions and love how sensible and open-minded everyone in this topic is. Even the people disagreeing with some of the statements.

That's because most of us are neither bigots or extremists. We might not all agree (I certainly don't agree with most of things people say when talking about diversity- I'm of the crowd that grew up in the 80s/90s that saw nothing but strong kick ****** women on the screen and in books, yet I have people half my age constantly tell me that women have never been portrayed like that in media, until they pushed for it) but most of us all want the same thing- to enjoy the hobby with like minded people.

I think some (not all) problems lay with the two extreme sides- both sides happen to be the loudest, most obnoxious of the spectrum and like news media constantly pushing agendas, eventually their views become the baseline, especially thanks to things like facebook/forums being echochambers, and eventually everyone has to fall into one camp or the other (they don't, but that's how these groups work)

Most of us just want to play cool games, with cool models and as long as both yourself and the people are around you are having fun, most don't care who that is with.

Personally, I don't want to see GW push for getting more women or children in the hobby. I'd rather we continue to see a push for more people with a strong passion to get into the hobby. Which they are doing so fantastically right now.

Edit: Apologies. Turns out using an English word for 'bottom' is picked up by the filter. I'll edit it if need be :)

Edited by RexHavoc
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...